Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Shake up at Anet.. RIP WvW

devilisciousdeviliscious Member UncommonPosts: 4,359
edited March 2016 in Guild Wars 2
So  Mike Obrien is replacing Colin as Game Director and they still are refusing to treat WvW like a large scale PvP mode. For those who do not remember Mike Obrien is who thinks WvW players love PvE content so unless that changes by some miracle, chances of WvW ever making  come back are slim to none.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/48zlyd/im_mike_obrien_here_with_gw2_dev_team_ama/
 
 A few highlights of why this is so bad:
“The WvW team’s current top priority is fixing population imbalance. It’s a really hard technical problem. It has taken us a long time to ship a solution, so it’s been a long time since we’ve shipped significant updates, and of course that hurts.” ~ Mike-OBrien-ArenaNet 

At a high level we plan to address core WvW issues such as population imbalance, scoring issues, and rewards. Of those, the first updates you’ll see will be related to population balance and rewards. ~Anet-TylerB 


Sounds great right? Until you think about the reason why WvW is actually doing so bad.. The  current Boycott of WvW is because  players hate the PvE garbage, the HoT guild buff robbery and the terrain, layout and map of the new desert Borderlands.. but they aren't fixing that..  the reason the population declined in the first place was because Anet refused to treat WvW like a large scale PvP game mode.. and they aren't fixing  that.. WvW Players said they are willing to spend their own  real $$ to do so if they can receive nonstop strategic, challenging  and fun PvP action in WvW.. but they are not fixing that. Nope they plan on pouring sugar on top of a rotten plate of food and then wonder why no one is eating it instead, adding their horrific EoTM alliance system and be done with it while they sit on their hands about the real issues and watch all the WvW guilds leave the game forever. There are many much better ways to address the population issues than  what they have been testing, and WvW rewards should  just be incentives for the existing WvW players to do more, not bring in PvE gold farmers to take a spot on the team that could be used by an actual WvW player instead. It is sad to see it end this way. If Anet was just willing to treat WvW like a  large scale PvP game mode as the players asked for from  the beginning it would have never been this bad in the first place. Sadly, I am afraid they are still going to take it in the opposite direction until there is nothing left of it to salvage.

 They can keep their rotten plate of food covered in sugar while the game dies wondering  why all the WvW  guilds moved on  to other games taking their $$ with them. Considering WvW players spend more Real $$ daily than both their PvE and PvP players combined, they are going to have much less $$ to work with to pay for the PvE junk they wanted to add in the first place. What many failed to realize is that WvW players were paying for their PvE updates.. PvE players do not need to buy thousands of gold daily because they earn everything they need to play PvE in PvE, PvP players didn't need to spend $ to play either since PvP doesn't cost anything. It was the WvW players spending a ton of real $ at the gem store to buy gold  and gems for server transfers, siege for their server,  food and stones,  weapons  and armor upgrades for multiple characters and builds for those characters, multiple accounts to scout,  and paying other players to scout towers since it was a crappy job, but they need someone to do it.. Running these players off from the game means running off all of t hat real $$ that was being spend every day to write their  paychecks..

Of course they thought " if we bring the PvE players into WvW then we have more WvW players to spend their real $$ to pay for stuff" , since there are more PvE players in the game than WvW players in the first place.  Of course this is terribly ignorant since PvE and WvW players are very different types of players. PvE  players don't spend $ to play, they chase the shinies in game and horde them.. all you do by doing this is run off the players spending actual $ and are left with players not spending $ instead. That means less players spending $ daily  so you have less $ to pay your staff to make new content. GG Anet.
«1

Comments

  • cronius77cronius77 Member UncommonPosts: 1,652
    edited March 2016
    there isnt going to be a good realm vs realm game out there until camelot unchained releases from the one who pretty much created RvR mark jacobs. ESO is in the same exact boat they over promised some DAOC successor and delivered a gear based champion point vet rank based realm vs realm that is terrible and they barely support anymore also. None of these games ever capture true realm vs realm because of this garbage mega server tech and switching around realms, guesting, friends list server/side swapping. The only way any game will be good is if its totally designed from the ground up with realm vs realm in mind and not a pve first game with extra pvp in it added on.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    edited March 2016
    DAoC had the same issue. And Mythic worked "continuously" to try and fix it offering this, that and the other but never managed it. Arguably they eventually made things worse by offering rewards to the weaker realm which partially offset the rewards a sucessful realm could achieve.
     
    The problem with such rewards however is that they all operated at a "world" level. Consequently you - as an individual - didn't / don't need to do anything as it will go away because others will take action. Needless to say this results in the status quo.

    1. To fix the issue action must be taken at a personal level. Recognise this and the fix is simple.

    2. First what drives your typical player (whether PvE, PvP or WvW)? Answer: progression. We want the best gear, food, potions and for min/maxers classes, racial bonuses etc.

    3. So if something is introduced that we had to do in order to "gain" an extra "20%" power say then there is a very good chance that we will strive for that bonus.

    4. Now a hypothetical: what would population balance look like for an individual player? Only one player hence hypothetical! The answer those would be the player a) played a character of equal power c) for each realm/world/faction c) over a (rolling) period of time.

    The precise mechanics of how to achieve this could vary but this is one example. 

    Day 1. Player plays a level 50 character in 2 sided WvW for 4 hours supporting side A. This attracts 200A points say. Discussion: this approach would factor in both the player level or power or average ilevel and the time taken. The latter might have to be some activity measure e.g. kills or deaths to avoid "zombies". Multi-boxing shouldn't be an issue as long as it is tied to unique accounts.

    Player does the same for the next 10 days at the end of which he/she has 2000A points. 

    Day 11. Player again takes to the field for side A; after 1 hour he/she gains 50A points more and this results in a 0.5% hit on all stats/damage output. After 4 hours its 2%.

    Day 20. Player A racks up 4000A points and has a 20% hit on all stats. At which point - lets say - no further penalty is given. Also no further A points would be accrued. Discussion: the idea of a grace period is to allow a player to play one faction for a period of time if they wish without penalty. The rate at which the penalty would accrue and how large it might grow are obviously something the devs would have to decide. The reason for capping the number of A points is that you want the player to play different sides - if it gets to high the player will never try to redress the imbalance. 

    In 3 sided RvRvR it would be a 20% penalty against both other factions.

    Player decides that he/she is being steam rolled by people who don't have the penalty and sets about rectifying the imbalance by ...... playing for the other side(s).

    So Day 21 player spends 4 hours playing with a level 50 character for side B gets 200B points. Discussion. The player could get a bonus - initially 20% say - which would fall to zero as the player played realm B. If this was done players would then aim for high positive bonuses rather than zero negative bonuses. So same incentive basically - maximise stats - just different ways of implementing. (Any bonus would fall and the only way to restore it would be by putting some hours in on the other realm(s).)

    Day 30 player has 2000B points and 4000A points. The 2000 difference is the grace period and - at least for an hour - the player could go back to realm A with zero penalty or continue with realm B with zero bonus.

    Summary: What the devs need to set about creating, imo, is a way to allocate "points" for playing on a realm. If they spend more than some period on the same realm however a penalty and/or bonus kicks in. Based - essentially - on how much time a player has spent on realm A vs time on B vs. time on C etc. I assume it would be an A to B, A to C, B to C calc. Again up to teh devs.  
         
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,720
    edited March 2016
    It is time to stop making RvRvR in mmos. That doesn't work well. Whatever you do, causes a problem somewhere else. Not a single RvRvR mmo has worked well. People are just nostalgic about DAoC and WAR. If all these RvRvR mmos didnt have to put so much resources and time on that stuff, they could relocate all that energy to improving the core game.




  • Soki123Soki123 Member RarePosts: 2,558
    It is time to stop making RvRvR in mmos. That doesn't work well. Whatever you do, causes a problem somewhere else. Not a single RvRvR mmo has worked well. People are just nostalgic about DAoC and WAR. If all these RvRvR mmos didnt have to put so much resources and time on that stuff, they could relocate all that energy to improving the core game.

    Did you play DAOC? If you did you were blindfolded while playing.
  • rodarinrodarin Member EpicPosts: 2,604
    How about people figure this out PvP IS DEAD. People only like it for the loot, if the loot isnt any good they wont do it. Every game has been trying to figure out PvP since it was first put into a game somewhere. They always have the same excuses as to why it fails but the biggest one is people try it for the thrills and once those are done they stop. 

    If PvP were so popular every single game that made it a focus wouldnt have gone tits up in less than a year. These new games coming out are going to see that as well, including Camelot 2.0. 

    The biggest problem is now that the old PC PvP crowd has just moved on ti first person shooter games, and they were replaced by gankers and trolls who dont have a clue what 'pvp' is.

    There are many reasons why PvP fails and why full PvP games are a complete waste of time and money, but the biggest one is people play them.
  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 10,720
    Soki123 said:
    It is time to stop making RvRvR in mmos. That doesn't work well. Whatever you do, causes a problem somewhere else. Not a single RvRvR mmo has worked well. People are just nostalgic about DAoC and WAR. If all these RvRvR mmos didnt have to put so much resources and time on that stuff, they could relocate all that energy to improving the core game.

    Did you play DAOC? If you did you were blindfolded while playing.
    Im not so blindfolded considering the game, although still running, is empty. If the RvR was so good it would be still full of subscribers making that RvR system still relevant among the competition. It was probably great when there was no other RvR out there. But today? nostalgia more than anything.




  • FlyingDutchmasterFlyingDutchmaster Member UncommonPosts: 9
    madness whata thing!
  • MoonKnighttMoonKnightt Member UncommonPosts: 148
    RVR is good only in the context of the "good ol' days". It's all nostalgia and it didn't work long term. Even a new game with it, you may as well put a expiration date like you would yogurt. Only a matter of time before it goes bad.

    I have fallen victim to this myself. I'd reflect fondly on an old movie I loved as a kid. Decide to watch it again and it doesn't hold up well. It comes off as dated, and my adult self really doesn't like it. I was so convinced I would love it just as much too. Not always.

    RVR was great back then because there was nothing like it. It was fresh, new and blew people away. Now the players know the formula and that increases the expiration date even faster. I also believe RvR is generally a waste of time because of MOBAs.

    The pvp minded younger gamers head in the MOBA direction. So the system doesn't get enough fresh blood to work.
  • cronius77cronius77 Member UncommonPosts: 1,652
    edited March 2016
    Soki123 said:
    It is time to stop making RvRvR in mmos. That doesn't work well. Whatever you do, causes a problem somewhere else. Not a single RvRvR mmo has worked well. People are just nostalgic about DAoC and WAR. If all these RvRvR mmos didnt have to put so much resources and time on that stuff, they could relocate all that energy to improving the core game.

    Did you play DAOC? If you did you were blindfolded while playing.
    Im not so blindfolded considering the game, although still running, is empty. If the RvR was so good it would be still full of subscribers making that RvR system still relevant among the competition. It was probably great when there was no other RvR out there. But today? nostalgia more than anything.
    you are really jaded to say the least. DAOC is not nostalgia realm vs realm was destroyed with a expansion later on that gave huge power gaps with artifacts and master levels.  At its time it was doing almost as well as EQ and was out what fours years before wow even released it did well for many years to come until wow hit its prime time and people were just burned out from a old out-dated game just like wow is going that way now. People move on because they get tired of doing the same thing over and over. I will agree warhammer sucked though only because they didnt do tri-realm vs realm and the power gaps between class balance sucked on release driving people away, you can blame that on that moron at trion that worked on rift after he got laid off from mythic but by then the damage was done. EQ was pve at the time and DAOC was pvp, those two were the behemoths of the early days.
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,998
    Usually the more players likes something in a game the less incentives you have to offer to get them to play it.  Sure start having legendaries drop in WvW and those zones would be packed.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • WarWitchWarWitch Member UncommonPosts: 351

    Anet does not care about wvw at all. They fired all of the wvw devs. They don't even fix wvw game breaking bugs. Example using game mechanics u can keep a castle perma contested and stay invisible. A contested castle means one side can not portal to it, so they have to walk ax extra 2-5 minets across the map. Over the course of a week this is game breaking. We have castles where the castle guards agro the monsters out side of the keep which causes it to be contested. We have Zero rewards for defending, fighting when loosing, or even fighting when winning that is even close to loot and money earned  in pve for an hour. Example in 10 hours today I earned over 168 gold doing mindless pve content. In 10 hours in wvw commanding I would spend around 450 sage, foods, buying banners. Even if our zerg is totally winning every fight the bosses in wvw and the bags players drop in wvw do not even pay 1/10 of what can be earned in pve. Also a lot and I mean a lot of the 10 hours will be spend walking to and fro looking for the fights. Anet made this much worse by making the maps a Lot bigger. its so bad I kid you not about 4 weeks back we watched 4 anet dev's drop flame rams on a wall and try to take the wall down OMG. Then they retryied it again :(. ( Flame rams have never worked on a wall, they are for gates). Ask any of the few remaning top commanders what they thing about anet and wvw. Example ask DK rank 6k + guild rank over 60 on YB, or CGD. The new wvw maps are horrable,,, their are several places that no defensive sage can be used so a small force can not defend againce a zerg at all. So wvw is zerg game of who has the most online at the time nothing to do with player skill by the end of the week, Look at the points per tick per time of day and how the trends each day are all the same. If yb for has more na players they win those time zones. If JQ had more sea players they win those hours every day. What happens is over time no one like to loose and so the na players move to YB and the sea players move to JQ. Whichmakes even more unbalance. The Big different in in wvw and pvp is pvp is limited to 5v5. Wvw is 80v80v80 on 5 maps so really its 400. vs 400. vs 400,.

    Its time game dev teams realize why people play games a study in psy would really help them.

    1. People want to feel good and are willing to spend big bucks doing so, giving to others fancy foods, fancy drinks, desiginer drugs, clothes, cars,. Example 80 doller wine, meals, weed, outfit, 80k cars or even 80 doller football tickets. See the trend here we are willing pay lots for what makes us feel good.

    2. Games are played in free time.

    3. All we have to choose is how we spend the time we have. So during our free time we are looking for ways to stroke our ego and be accepted by the pack, we are pack animals by nature and look to be accepted. Example player loges in and askes the commander what class his zerg needs the commander goes we need more front line, the player switches to front liner.

    4. So the dev teams need to make the progression ego boosting for both sides.  Also this has to be modified by what advancement can be gained over the same time played in pve. 

    5. If it takes 80 hours to make a new back pack take war masters for example which is a ego boasting itme or any of the items people link in map and guild chat to say hay look at me I accomplished something. The it should be possible ways to earn the same ego boosing items from the same time in wvw.

    Look at what Camelot is doing u will have unlimited progression if I spend time you will advance in power in titles in skills in gear in shiny loot. You will be rewarded for you time equaly to other players. In gw2 you would have less in wvw per hour then you would have in pve.

    Its not to late for gw2 wvw but massive changes will have to be made and since the games been out for years we don't expect it from the current dev team at anet.

    Sorry english is no good.   


  • simpliussimplius Member UncommonPosts: 1,134
    Usually the more players likes something in a game the less incentives you have to offer to get them to play it.  Sure start having legendaries drop in WvW and those zones would be packed.

    yup..with gold farmers, bots, and hackers

    i bet they would hear the exploding servers on mars

    the gameplay should be the reward..not a shiny

    no matter what system they make, someone will find(or make) a hole in it

  • ellobo29ellobo29 Member UncommonPosts: 423
    rodarin said:
    How about people figure this out PvP IS DEAD. People only like it for the loot, if the loot isnt any good they wont do it. Every game has been trying to figure out PvP since it was first put into a game somewhere. They always have the same excuses as to why it fails but the biggest one is people try it for the thrills and once those are done they stop. 

    If PvP were so popular every single game that made it a focus wouldnt have gone tits up in less than a year. These new games coming out are going to see that as well, including Camelot 2.0. 

    The biggest problem is now that the old PC PvP crowd has just moved on ti first person shooter games, and they were replaced by gankers and trolls who dont have a clue what 'pvp' is.

    There are many reasons why PvP fails and why full PvP games are a complete waste of time and money, but the biggest one is people play them.
    Are you on drugs? PVP dead? Then why practically every game coming out has some form of PVP? This statement makes me laugh.

    PVP is not dead, its great when it works but not alot of companies are doing it right is the problem. Some do but not many.  And I am right now playing alot of games that are doing it great, or near great.

    My personal feeling is they don't have alot of hack/cheat protection in game atm which is becoming more and more problematic for them. WVW was at its greatest when they had seasons. They need to bring seasons back 3 months on with 3 months off and each season with unique rewards of weapon/armor skins per season and minis and wvw finishers. Start balancing and fix the screw up they made with the boarderlands. And boom the people will come back.
  • KabulozoKabulozo Member RarePosts: 932
    edited March 2016
    PvP in GW2 has always been pointless anyway. it's hylarious, a game called Guild Wars has no actual guild wars.
  • VutarVutar Member UncommonPosts: 936
    I am amazed anyone still plays GW2. I was bored with it in a month and haven't looked back. It was easy to see early on that WvW was going to be a disaster.
  • eye_meye_m Member UncommonPosts: 3,317

    I don' play WvW much because it can be boring to try and get started with the group(s). I would like to be able to log into the map and say "I have this skillset, where can I help?" and then get the direction I need to start taking part. What happens too often is I map in, then put a request out on worldchat that may or may not be responded to and spend the next 10 minutes running to try and catch up with the group. If I get caught by the opponents I may have to start over with the running. It's just not instant enough to get to participation.

    Plus, I need some better rewards. I like to spend gold > gems and buy stuff in the gem shop with it. PvE farming fuels my spending habits.

    All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.

    I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.

    I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.

    I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter Member UncommonPosts: 3,066
    edited March 2016
    It is interesting because with this new borderlands 2 players can easily capture a tower (I've even soloed towers) and 5-6 can grab keeps (garrisson take more). Part of that is because less people are playing but part is also because the maps are way bigger (you can discretely drop 2 catapults in a corner of the tower).

    People complained about WvW being blob vs blob (blobs could move so fast, even jumping from maps to maps, and easily defend what a small group was trying to take). The new maps make that harder so now people complain it is PvE.

    People complained that upgrading structures costed too much in WvW. Now it is free (time/dolyak based) so people complain that there is no loss when you lose structures.

    I have a more interesting time PvE wise (more variety of enemies in different towers/keeps) and small skirmishwise in this new WvW version.
    Big battles, the other version was  better.

    There is also a complain that HoT guild hall system took way some stuff guilds had before and now takes (took) time to get back, which is in no way related to the new borderland maps.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • PrecusorPrecusor Member UncommonPosts: 3,589
    Vutar said:
    I am amazed anyone still plays GW2. I was bored with it in a month and haven't looked back. It was easy to see early on that WvW was going to be a disaster.
    GW2 turret engineer was my favorite class mech till the nerfed it.. 

    Stopped playing after that.
  • NathanPenetrationNathanPenetration Member UncommonPosts: 26
    Mike O'brien is a snake oil salesman. The devs are perpetually incompetent, and Anet's company history over the past 3 years has consisted of fallacious comments regarding new content, endless delays, and now blatant false advertising regarding their removal of all further development of Legendary weapons. It's a pathetic company with no interest in giving their customers what they've paid for. Good riddance.
  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441
    rodarin said:
    How about people figure this out PvP IS DEAD. People only like it for the loot, if the loot isnt any good they wont do it. Every game has been trying to figure out PvP since it was first put into a game somewhere. They always have the same excuses as to why it fails but the biggest one is people try it for the thrills and once those are done they stop. 

    If PvP were so popular every single game that made it a focus wouldnt have gone tits up in less than a year. These new games coming out are going to see that as well, including Camelot 2.0. 

    The biggest problem is now that the old PC PvP crowd has just moved on ti first person shooter games, and they were replaced by gankers and trolls who dont have a clue what 'pvp' is.

    There are many reasons why PvP fails and why full PvP games are a complete waste of time and money, but the biggest one is people play them.
    The gankers and trolls where always there, but yes, a lot of the regularPvP players have moved over to FPS games.

    And yes, FPS games are better at PvP but that is because they are made only for PvP and have the right mechanics for it. You can't autowin a fight on stats in a FPS game as you can in most PvP games. However did GW2 actually do that part right with the PvP, even a new character can kill you if the player is far better then you.

    The problem though is that WvW isn't as meaningsful as it should be and it rewards zerging. You can't stop zergs in any kind of massive PvP but in GW2 you earn more when you run in a zerg with far less risk then running in a small team so they messed up the risk Vs reward ratio.

    I do PvP in GW2, I PvE more but I do like solo-jump 2 or 3 players since I enjoy a challenge and no PvE content will get me the same kick. Of course I do die now and then (sometimes a lot), with 3 players you just need one who knows what he or she is doing somewhat and Im done for it but that is why I like it, it is unpredictable and forces me to think fast (I play a theif and with my limited stealth one good hit from anyone will bring me down).

    I am not so worried about class balance, certain classes do have some advantage but I seen more then a few players kicking several opponents with any class. This french necro girl totally killed 4 of my guildies at the same time so I waited until she had healed and jumped her, never gotten myself that outclassed before or after in any game. :dizzy: 

    MMOs seriously need to improve their PvP and not just GW2 but all of them (GW2 is actually one of the best at the moment). Any combat between 2 players or 2 equal sides can not be determined before it starts, that is why FPS combat is more popular with PvPers. Of course you also need progression so it shouldn't be only about player skill, I would say that when a great player who got a new toon can beat a badly playing toon with max power just barely you have the formula right.
  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 8,914
    It is time to stop making RvRvR in mmos. That doesn't work well. Whatever you do, causes a problem somewhere else. Not a single RvRvR mmo has worked well. People are just nostalgic about DAoC and WAR. If all these RvRvR mmos didnt have to put so much resources and time on that stuff, they could relocate all that energy to improving the core game.
    War was only RvR
  • TolmosTolmos Member UncommonPosts: 141
    I will never understand why WvW is not considered PvP, in the respect of having the gear normalized. It makes absolutely no sense to me, and is easily the biggest detractor I have seen for the game. What could possibly have caused them to stop and say "Wow, yea, lets make this AMAZING PvP system and let's make this AMAZING PvP arena, and lets not at all combine the two. Instead, the PvP arena will be governed by PvE rulesets and gear disparities. Best idea ever!"

    When it was first announced to be this way, I thought it was a fluke or a bug. 4 years later and it's pretty obvious to not be the case, which is a real shame. :( I keep holding out hope that one day WvW will be considered PvP... but I'm thinking that's too tall of an order.
  • goboygogoboygo Member RarePosts: 2,141
    cronius77 said:
    there isnt going to be a good realm vs realm game out there until camelot unchained releases from the one who pretty much created RvR mark jacobs. ESO is in the same exact boat they over promised some DAOC successor and delivered a gear based champion point vet rank based realm vs realm that is terrible and they barely support anymore also. None of these games ever capture true realm vs realm because of this garbage mega server tech and switching around realms, guesting, friends list server/side swapping. The only way any game will be good is if its totally designed from the ground up with realm vs realm in mind and not a pve first game with extra pvp in it added on.

    Hate the mega server. Give me a server, give me a community that doesn't change with every session.  Lets us fight against others.  If you want out, its a paid transfer.  Choose wisely.
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 11,804
    cronius77 said:
    there isnt going to be a good realm vs realm game out there until camelot unchained releases from the one who pretty much created RvR mark jacobs. ESO is in the same exact boat they over promised some DAOC successor and delivered a gear based champion point vet rank based realm vs realm that is terrible and they barely support anymore also. None of these games ever capture true realm vs realm because of this garbage mega server tech and switching around realms, guesting, friends list server/side swapping. The only way any game will be good is if its totally designed from the ground up with realm vs realm in mind and not a pve first game with extra pvp in it added on.
    No, in a lot of ways ESO nailed it. As a member of Daggerfall I hated the EP and AD. We all did. It is and has been superior to anyting on the market including GW2 for quite some time now.
    "We see fundamentals and we ape in"
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    Every single thread that has anything to do with PVP is met by a group of emotional, melodramatic, highly ignorant carebears who will try to correlate random things to say how terrible PVP is. The statements are typically ridiculous and have no logic or common sense attached.

    Why does it keep happening? Why do these types of people campaign so hard? Is it emotional/mental baggage?
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sign In or Register to comment.